Pastor's amazing response after being suspended for not renouncing his gay children

On Monday, the United Methodist Church convicted Rev. Frank Schaefer on two counts against the Church for officiating his son’s same-sex wedding, in which he has responded to. Liz Cheney, here’s some advice for you on how to love your relatives for who they are because 3 of Schaefer’s 4 children are gay. You’re welcome Liz!

Schaefer is suspended for 30 days, and if it at the end of that time he has not renounced his support for marriage equality, he will be defrocked.

Schaefer, however, was unapologetic, refusing the invitation to “repent of your actions”:

SCHAEFER: [The Church] needs to stop judging people based on their sexual orientation. We have to stop the hate speech. We have to stop treating them as second-class Christians. […]
I will never be silent again. This is what I have to do. […]

I have to minister to those who hurt and that’s what I’m doing.
Three of Schaefer’s four children identify as gay.
After his sentence was announced, his supporters began overturning chairs in the courtroom, a reference to the biblical story of Jesus and the moneychangers.

Schaefer’s critics framed his actions as “breaking the rules” and “rebuking” the Church.

Rev. Frank Schaefer was told he would lose his credentials if he doesn’t follow church law, but in his response, he says he cannot remain silent over his support of the LGBT community. Schaefer explains that he will not refuse ministry to anybody.

If a gay couple in the next 30 days wants to get married and if they quality, he said he would officiate their wedding.

Wow – there is a real man. One who stands up for his beliefs instead of following the RW lemmings and drooling trolls over the nearest cliff-of-the-day.
I truly pity those who feel their marriages are threatened by gay marriage – perhaps there are some inner “stirrings and feelings” they are in deep denial about?
It is sad that the RWNJ’s feel our personal lives are their private business – but it indicates they may have some serious personal issues about their own marriages.
Hiding something maybe?

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Plus, he’s really hawt. Did I jus type that out loud?

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

It’s okay, we can’t help it.

BanditBasheert

YOU TWO!!!

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Oh right, like you didn’t notice.

Teresa Monica Cross

Yes, he is cute!

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

I’ll fight you for him!

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

good thing I missed this last night, or it could have been another battle royale – and we know how the last one turned out!

Jeanne173

O.K. I’ll give you that, for a youngster he is kinda cute.

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

That’ll show Bandit!

Shanasmiles

I’m confused. The minister is a youngster? He has multiple grown kids… I must have missed something lol.

Jeanne173

At my age he’s a youngster. I would be more interested in what his daddy looks like.

Shanasmiles

Oh..ok I suppose. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder he looks old enough to be my dad and I have teenagers old enough to date.

Shanasmiles

The minister is Hawt?

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Yes yes he is:-)

Teresa Monica Cross

I agree!

mea_mark

The Church, if it wants to remain relevant needs more people like him, not less. I hope the Church can see the error of their ways and get back on track. The Church should be leading, not dictating. This man is a leader.

bomber

Pope Francis is doing his best…

langranny

He can become an Episcopalian. They are much more reasonable about such things.

Teresa Monica Cross

Yes, the Episcopal Church is accepting of LGBT people and doesn’t care who or what you are to belong. Rev Frank Schaefer should immediately be welcomed into the Episcopal Church and become a priest!

Tony Carr

Not that easy, although they are liberal on some things they are not so liberal on church order.

timothy b.lines

christ was befor king james,the third bible religion,the one that uses old testament vengeful god.

Cosmic_Surfer

Yesua was before the New Testament – that particular book of fables was written well after he was long gone…And manipulated, edited, cut, rewritten …….. creating over 150 separate versions..

Hank

“Book of fables” is too harsh and you are intelligent, enough to know that. It is a reasonably accurate written history of Jesus’ life. All of which was recorded AFTER his death, based on spoken words, memories of those who actually knew and walked with Him and certainly containing some embellishment and manipulation to make “Jesus” fit the prophesies of the Messiah.

But “Book of fables” would not be accurate.

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

A decade ago I struggled with the church’s demands for a particular behavior and my lack of “faith”. I was certain I was the problem, and I was miserable. Once I decided to embrace the atheist/agnostic in me (and it was a process) I have never been happier. Although it took awhile, I can see organized religion clearly – both the good and the bad. This type of demand should never be asked of anyone, particularly someone who is required by his job definition to be accepting and tolerant.

Even those who believe are leaving the church, and who can blame them. This is not how I understood the teachings of Jesus to be shared with the masses.

wuzzi

I suffer from an incurable illness. At least a few times a year I will be confronted with someone that I either do not believe “right” or “enough” and if I just prayed and believed, I could be healed.

It really crushes me. I cannot figure out how to not believe anymore – I have been Christian for 40-plus years, but I cannot figure out HOW to believe “right” to be healed. SMH

mrsgunka

Hang in there wuzzi….you know what is in your heart. You do what you believe and you will have peace. No one lives forever. I have found that the person who is afraid of dying has the least amount of faith. There is no magic wand. Live and love, for someday it will be gone but you have left this world a better place. Not many can do that. We all have an incurable illness…it’s called life. We are born, we live and we die. It’s the journey that counts. And how we treat others that makes us a good person. Right now we have so much hate and it does no one any good. I have been fighting cancer with the help of some very smart doctors for 7+ years. I have had some rough times, but I’m still here. I thank God every morning for another day, even when I can’t put one foot in front of the other. Today my radiation oncologist told me, he thinks I have beaten it. I’m so thankful. I have a very sick husband who needs me. I am thankful. Nothing says that I won’t be run over by a car tomorrow or the bastard won’t come back somewhere else, but until them, I celebrate life and my family and the fun I have on the internet meeting people from every corner in the world when I can’t get out and do things I used to. I still have part of my mind that old age hasn’t stolen from me. So I can’t do what I did 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 , 70 years ago, it’s not going to stop me from giving Carla and Anomaly a hard time, it makes me laugh inside! I just love them and I don’t even know them, but they have made me smile thru my days. Just remember to smile at everyone you meet….you have no idea what they are facing today or walked a miles in their shoes and you may be the only one that smiles at them. And it feels so good to smile! If you want to really feel good….smile at a baby who is crying and look them right in the eye when you smile! Bet they stop crying! Always works for me and momma just drops her shoulders and smiles at you… with thanks in her eyes! Hang in there!

wuzzi

Thank you. Except for being challenged that I don’t believe right, usually my faith inspires others. It confuses me to be told that I just have to do it a different way. I believe that I can be in this journey for a purpose (and Romans 8:28 assures me that it can be so) – so why am I not allowed to be as I am, and wait patiently to see what happens next? I don’t have to be perfectly healthy to be perfectly me.

May you be blessed with continued health and the joy and hope you share with others. <3

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

You know we love you too. Imagine the chaos if you weren’t here to keep us in line!

tiredoftea

Good on him for finally figuring out that supporting his children is much more important than his church’s political position.

Republicans_are_Evil

There are millions of pastors and priests in this country. How many of them spend any time online calling right wingers out for playing God and bearing false witness in the online world? Most priests and pastors are just doing the religious thing for an easy life. They don’t live what they preach.

Diane

Methodists are not known for being anything but stuck in the past and very unyielding to common sense.

Gretchen1

Diane, not all Methodists are like that. There is a growing movement amongst us to minister to ALL, and our churches becoming what is known as Reconciling Congregations. The church my wife and I belong to just became one.

Cosmic_Surfer

You are exactly correct, There is a huge difference between the RW fundamentalists that control KS from the West side of the state (they make Baptists look progressive) and those who tend around larger metropolitan areas (eg, KC, LA, Chicago). My ex-father-in-law was a Methodist minister and one of the leading ministers for the conference in Northeastern KS. He was an absolute Christian in the real sense – a gentleman, artist, and purely progressive humanitarian accepting everyone unconditionally – I was raised in the Methodist church in Lenexa, KS. Huge difference between congregations and leaders depending on the location. (I was excommunicated at age 16 and it was one of the best things that happened to me. My Universal Pantheism didn’t fit the paradigm…but I digress )

Judith Levine

And the United Methodist Church was not always like this. Our Jewish kids went to their daycare and there was not a more liberal or accepting church in town at the time. Then, a holier than thou minister came in and took the whole place down to the corner and made a sharp right turn.

Cosmic_Surfer

My response below – not every church is equal nor are every congregation. The UMC has allowed conservatives into their hierarchy but that has little to do with the practices of individual churches unless they have the congregation complaining – the UMC really only cares about results – congregation numbers and the money they bring in

They were the only game in town, on the way to the UA from our house and they were really great with our Yiddische Kinder. And then a new Pharaoh came to town who was not so kind hearted… you know the story…

bomber

Unfortunately too many “Christians” play God by their judgement of others when really, judging others is above their pay grade. Good for him I say!

Ibbleschitz

Judging others is left to God alone… so if you’re Human, it’s above your paygrade

bomber

Exactly! That was my point and glad to have it seconded!

George Colom

christian = hate monger

BiblemanZ

Unfortunately, part of being a good Christian is being humble. So the ones who are incorrectly following the religion get all the attention while the ones following whole heartedly get nothing.

Ibbleschitz

read your bible from cover to cover. there is approved homosexuality in it. and there isn’t much demand for news where “MAN Poops in toilet today” kind of stories…

Tony Carr

Seriously? C’mon I know you are more intelligent than that.

George Colom

Good Morning Tony, you are right, I wanted to elicit a response, I do believe in looking past all the stuff that makes us different, being gay, christian, color of skin, whatever and looking at the person, what kind of human are you, and not putting on labels, as many do, makes you short sighted, it’s the kind of thinking that does not let the world heal, I would never try to impose my point of view on you, but together we can go farther by agreeing to disagree, and reaching a happy medium, tolerance is required in order to keep an open mind.

phoenixchick

I am Christian (and somewhat ashamed, based on the above article, to admit that I am United Methodist). Please understand that a GREAT MANY of us DO NOT agree with this action. We find that censure and defrocking for supporting and affirming two people who love each other is “counter to Christian practice,” to use terminology from our Book of Discipline. There will be a day where the official stance of the church will change, as it has in others.

Doesn’t surprise me. Frank Schaeffer has for several years now had a bad habit of telling the truth and well that doesn’t go over real big with righties. It like the fundamentalist Dominunist Baptist church which I grew up in. They never did seem to be real thrilled when I would mention, “You guys do know that Jesus was a Jew right?”

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

Good for him, now we only need several thousand more of him.

Teresa Monica Cross

Frank Schaefer and Frank Schaeffer are two different men. One Methodist and the Other is Eastern Orthodox.

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

thank you

http://eqcf.org/ Equality Case Files

Different spelling, different age, different Frank Schaefer.

SurvivorGirl

No. I’m not sure where that info originated.

Teresa Monica Cross

No the Frank Schaeffer who is the son of Francis Schaeffer is an Eastern Orthodox Christian and a lay writer on the subject of Orthodox Christianity. The Methodist minister is a different Frank Schaefer. Schaeffer who is Orthodox wrote the book called Dancing Alone!

Wayne Johnson

I was wondering this myself. One person says yes, one says no. Which is correct?

Tommy6860

This is a feel good story. This man is certainly one who views love from a spiritual perspective in the right way. This is a fact, you have no choice to whom you are attracted. When one denies, or is forced to deny that, there can no healthy consequences from it. His son knows what it is like to be truly loved. #LoveIsLove

KCMOfan

WOW! THIS is what Christianity is SUPPOSED to be about. Kudos to the Reverend. SHAME SHAME SHAME on the church. Jesus would be sickened by your actions.

lady liberal

Bless the man. Finally a church leader that follows the word of God. If there were more lik him, there would less people against religion.

Pjs8200

He can get his credentials on-line. Screw that, or any other church like it.

I am a victim/survivor of clergy abuse in the UMC. The abusers are the ones who should be defrocked (and the majority of them are not) – not the ones who are living out their true calling, as is Rev. Shaefer. I see this trial as yet one more diversion from the true problem. Shame on the UMC, indeed.

BiblemanZ

This literally is exactly what Christianity is about. Those who have a problem with what this man has done clearly have not read all of the book. Especially the gospel that is the very foundation of your religion. Excuse a Bible scholar here for a second but in the book of Matthew alone (you know the first one about Jesus) He tells us to “Love thy neighbor as thyself” and “judge not lest ye be judged yourself, the measure you use on other shall in turn be used on you.” I apologize to those who are not Christian for going Bible scholar, but if I can help spread understanding in my religion, I will go there.

psdear1967

Where did you receive your theological training?

phoenixchick

What, in what was written above is false?

psdear1967

I didn’t say he said anything false, just genuinely asking a question as to were he received his theological training… I thought he may have graduated from the same theological school that I did.

Cat Marcuri

lol. The man was absolutely right. Christianity is SUPPOSED to be about loving and accepting ALL people. Unfortunately, any system works, until you add human beings into it. Then it goes to hell in a handbasket…

BiblemanZ

I will openly admit that I have had not proper training with the Bible. However, I HAVE read the book carefully cover to cover and decided to make up my own mind on the parts that were left unclear to me. I went to my pastor for assistance when it just felt wrong but other than that, it was entirely done solo.

Olde Blonde Broad

Come to the Episcopal church where you can indeed minister to all. Good for you, Pastor.

Rob Osberg

Please don’t think that the Episcopal church is always welcoming. I recently started attending an “open and affirming” Episcopal church in my community with friends who, like me, identify with the LGBT community. One recent Sunday I was informed…”You’re sitting in our pew. And shouldn’t you be sitting with your other homo friends? “….Needles to say, I left and haven’t returned. Also some of my friends have also been made to feel unwelcome…….Just saying. And BTW, I’m a senior (65plus) gay man.

kate

Are you sure you were in an Episcopalian church? This sounds like an rare exception to the Episcopal ethos of accepting and loving all. All are welcome.

Hryflex

WOW! In my parish, if a visitor sits in the “accustomed pew” of someone who in earlier times would have rented that pew, it is expected that that parishioner should invite that visitor to Sunday dinner. AND put out the good china. Being an Episcopalian carries lots of responsibility. I expect that the rector would be scandalized by that behavior towards you, and have told that parishioner (and I remember that happening in my parish) exactly how to treat visitors. I was unexpectedly present at such an event and the rector pulled no punches.

Rob Osberg

Thanks Kate…but I think the church here in south Mississippi are still not very welcoming.

kate

Rob, I am so sorry that happened to you. If you ever get to Jacksonville, visit us at St. George on Ft. George Island. Small mission church on a barrier island that follows the teachings of Jesus.

Robin Weisbrod

As with any “church”, the National Church is welcoming, but the local churches, not so much. Our little Episcopal Church would love to be welcoming, but I’m not sure, they would be so out and out rude by calling you a “homo”, but there are always other ways. The majority of people in our little church are warm and loving, there are a few. Can’t control what they say or do, just how we respond to them. By the way, we are a small church in Central NY.

Rob Osberg

Thanks Robin. This church where I live in south Mississippi….well, not very progressive.

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

Is there anything progressive (or liberal) in South Mississippi? Just joking. I am sure there are pockets of sane liberals/progressives, everywhere. It is just really sad that people can be so cruel & speak so harshly to their fellow humans. Hope you find a really nice place who treats you well in KC. Another church that welcomes all are Unitarian Universalists.

Don Plummer

I’m so sorry Rob. I know that not all Episcopalians are loving and kind. But I also know that most are open and truly welcoming. Our Diocese in Atlanta asked parishes if they would be willing to be listed as welcoming and affirming to members of the LGBT community on brochures handed out at this year’s Gay Pride weekend and parade. Here’s the web page that includes that listing and more about our ministry to and with LGBT persons. https://www.episcopalatlanta.org/Content/LGBT_Ministries_.asp

Rob Osberg

Thanks Don for the encouraging word. Sadly, this particular Episcopalian church was listed on an international web site which lists open and affirming churches, and the friend who invited me has also been humiliated by members in this church…..not the first church I’ve been un-invited from, sadly. But then I have to remind myself I do live in south Mississippi….or as I sometimes say, “dumbf***istan”. Soon will be relocating to Kansas City and will be part of a Metropolitan Community Church there.

James Nimmons

they shouldn’t have asked..they should have told them that human rights and treatment aren’t up to a vote..play nice or gtfo.. so they really did no moral favors by voting on whether or not other people have feelings…

KathleenVS

I am so sorry you were treated poorly. Please don’t give up on finding a church. If there aren’t any more Episcopal churches close, how about a United Church of Christ?

geno

Oh no no no … My last church experience was at an Episcopal “plant” in Tennessee, where the priest just about went nutz when Gene Robinson was named a bishop. I left, never to return.

http://www.yamanoor.com/ Yamanoor Srihari

Religion is stupid.

Tony Carr

You are stupid, you must be religious.

frumpus

Tony Carr you are the stupidest person alive for being a religous nutbag

Tony Carr

Not stupid or a nutbag. Just tolerant and unbigoted.

Tony Carr

You are intolerant because you hate intolerance? Nope you are just a bigot. No better than Republicans who pretend to be Christians to hide their bigotry.

Tony Carr

Frumpy you are just sad and ignorant and you know NOTHING about my faith. If I am the stupidest person alive (so mature) and your response is not more intelligent than that, I am scared to know how worse you are than that statement.

I know of hundreds of people who stopped being religious after reading Yamanoor’s post. You should stfu Richard H.

http://www.yamanoor.com/ Yamanoor Srihari

Look at the 9 up-votes dumbass.

Paul Vee

Religion is stupid. Religion is fiction. Religion is used to make billions of dollars. Religion is used as an excuse for hate and bigotry. Religion is appropriated for use that directly conflicts with the very messages that “Christians” (and others) claim to be upholding! #TaxAllChurchesNow

Hilda Whitby

Nice program, Paulbot. Do you execute it every time you see the word “religion”?

Paul Vee

No, Broomhildabot. What the hell are you talking about?

Tony Carr

You are painting with really broad brushes there buddy. Just like everything else, it can be good in moderation.

Paul Vee

Which moderation works though? Only the parts of the Bible that don’t rock someone else’s apple cart?

Tony Carr

Well I can tell you that extremism is destructive and your rhetoric doesn’t help facilitate mature and intelligent discussion. Whether the USSR, China, Cuba or other countries which removed religion did not guarantee hateful and bigoted actions. It doesn’t make me sad you are irreligious, it makes me sad you are so blind that you don’t see your words reinforce you have become the same thing you have been railing against.

billbo_66

Paul, I too have a hard time with religion but your a bit over zealous there bud. A majority of Christians are great loving people. However for to long the church has allowed the crazies to justify their views with religion.

scottrose

The myth of a virgin birth is a crock of shit!

Paul Vee

If I told you I knew – for a fact, and because of my faith – that the Tooth Fairy was real, would you believe me? Or Bigfoot, but with no grainy film proof? How about the Loch Ness Monster? If I told you the Tooth Fairy could give you ever lasting life – with your donation, of course – would you send me money so I could “save” you?

scottrose

All I can say is, take me to your leader! I absolutely, positively am prepared to have “faith” that any cockamamie nonsense you tell me is true!

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

What you say is true. There are many loving Christians & many good people who are in organized religion. The church HAS allowed the crazies….however, the fact remains that most churches just follow along with it & they don’t bother to call out the “crazies” in their religions. I never made a very good “Christian” because I had too many questions…I could not accept things on blind faith & I came to resent the fact that out of many religions some Christians couldn’t accept their holy book as Sacred Myth. I couldn’t swallow Noah’s Ark (all those animals from all different geographic zones; needing food (some predator & some prey); needing places to poop (& some pooping BIG piles) – all crowded up together in a boat? Only Noah & his family to repopulate the earth? That is incest & incest is not right. I also didn’t get Jonah & the Big Fish/Whale – no one could live in a whale & whales don’t eat men – couldn’t swallow one. (Although there was this one film when I taught World Religions that showed the whale hocking Jonah up like a loogie & launching him at the population/City Limit sign of Nineveh – that was quite entertaining). I couldn’t understand WHY the devout couldn’t recognize them for allegory & still follow even if it wasn’t true. All of these questions came to me as I was older but I remember a church that was able to not dwell upon the Bible Verses but dwell upon living. I remember a distinct separation of church & state. In school, we were taught that evolution was a theory that was recognized as true & on Sunday in Sunday School we were taught that God Created the World in 7 days & they existed side by side throughout all my childhood & into my adulthood.
Somewhere, at some point, the “Religionists” took over & began trying to present GOD & the Bible as the only thing & the only way. Science became a dirty word. The difference between you & me is that I call them on it & I speak out. You seem to excuse them & make excuses for them.

Sharla Hulsey

You’d probably make a good Disciple. One of our central teachings is that every person has the freedom and responsibility to think for themselves about matters of faith. Questions are allowed.

tccstend

And now that you’ve patted yourself on the back…..

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

?????

tom lowe

But Paul, just like a moth to a flame, you obviously can’t stay away from “stupid religion” articles and posts. There’s a problem somewhere down deep in your psyche.

Paul Vee

Wow, thank you for pointing that out to me!
Do I address you as Sigmund Fraud or Dr. Shrill?

tom lowe

You may address me as “Your Daddy”.

Richard H

Dear Paul: your vitriol is a pretty good argument for religion. In fact, I suspect you are a fanatical Christian trying to discredit atheism.

Paul Vee

Yeah, see – Atheists don’t demand that a parent must renounce their own children in order to remain in good standing inside the cult – er, religion – and not lose their job.

Sharla Hulsey

Most Christians don’t, either, which is why this particular instance is “news.”

Dolores Scowden Rollins

The UMC has done more damage to me and my children than I care to think about. The best thing I ever did was leave that church. Good for you Pastor Schaefer!

Nancy Gillett

There are a number of churches that have been minister all for a long time including UCC and many Christian (Disciples of Christ) Churches. The media ignores that fact because there is no conflict to draw attention.

Robyn Ryan

You have to live with yourself.

billbo_66

I thought the Methodists were one of the moderate religions. The commercials say “we are here for you, with open hearts, open arms and open minds”. what happened to that?

phoenixchick

Here’s the thing about United Methodists. We are most definitely a heterogeneous lot. I am on the extremely liberal end of the spectrum, and there are also those who are extremely conservative. Generally, churches have pastors and congregants of similar beliefs. We also, sadly, have some very wealthy conservative groups who pay for votes at our General Conference. For a church, who is supposed to carry God’s will, it sure seems like some underhanded politicking goes on. It seems that if it was God’s will, this shouldn’t have to be done. It is in times like this that I am so ashamed. Please have faith that not all of us think like the judicial council.

psdear1967

As a United Methodist I concur with your comment. We are not all alike and sometimes we do not all agree on these issues. Hopefully one day we will all be one…

James Nimmons

why is there even a council?

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

Open Hearts, Open arms & Open minds is what I remembered from my childhood & from growing up Methodist. I was that until I found Unitarian Universalism….which actually IS the church of the loving hands, the church of the open mind & the church of the loving heart (kidspeak).

If you cannot welcome everyone & celebrate their loving commitment, then all the rest is just window dressing. UUism walks the walk & talks the talk of service. I am glad that we have programs like “Standing on the Side of Love” & the UUSC. Like the Methodists, our symbol contains flames not around a cross, but in a chalice.
Rev Frank would certainly be welcome in any UU Church as would all of his children. We manage to have congregations full of Pagans, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, Agnostics, Humanists & deeply spiritual people who would even call themselves Christian. We are straight & gay, Black, white, yellow, red & brown.

I am really glad that I grew up liberal Methodist because the conservative one is too much like all the religions that only dwell on getting to heaven while condemning everyone who isn’t just like you. What I remember about my childhood were Norman Vincent Peal type services that dwelt on how honestly we were supposed to treat our fellow travelers; how we were supposed to live our lives honestly & hopefully & how we were supposed to love one another & not judge.

tccstend

The Methodist Conference was taken over by non Methodists. The other part of this story is that all the Methodist deaconess have been fire from their churches and the Methodist Women have been harassed by the Institute on Religion and Democracy (a rogue Roman Catholic organization) for years. This has been a huge, ongoing war against peace and justice churches

Linda

Rev. Frank Schaefer sounds like he is an awesome human being…a true Christian. Oh, and he’s showing a lot of integrity.

Billcoop4

Pastor, you are loved and you are loving, and that reciprocal connection is the thing which matters. You have challenged both vacillation and ignorance (and I’m not sure which is worse) and have emerged as one of those who are called to stand against both, and against the powers-that-be. We love you for it, and we honor you, and we raise you up, in the holy celebration at which all of God’s people are (not will be) welcome. God bless you.

John Mason

As president of the Eastern Panhandle LGBTQ Alliance of West Virginia, I applaud your courage. I often ask, “Where are the voices of the Prophets today,” and I think I am hearing one! It is time to stop the madness that has taken over the Church (capital-C) against LGBTQ peoples. Thank you, Reverend Shaefer, for being a voice crying in the wilderness! ~Pastor John Mason

Michael Rigby

The voices of the prophets are everywhere. It’s the ears of the Church that aren’t working.

tccstend

It’s the ears of the Institute on Religion and Democracy that aren’t listening. The Methodist Convention was taken over by non Methodists. Ask a little old member of the Methodist Women or a Methodist Deaconess. The sons of boar hogs have been harassing Methodist women as well.

C.S. Stone

“Rev. Frank Schaefer was told he would lose his credentials if he doesn’t follow church law.. .” like that would be a bad thing, huh? Rev Schaefer is following GOD’S law… lovingly supporting those in need of spiritual, loving support… the church be damned.

Sharla Hulsey

If I remember correctly, Jesus fulfilled God’s law *by* welcoming those whom his religion’s establishment and ultra-righteous observers declared to be “sinners.” Sounds to me like this pastor is following Jesus, and the establishment of his church show themselves to be modern-day scribes and Pharisees.

jacob

this is what happens when we have organized religion. people make rules instead of doing the lords work

Chuckles Hotzenpfeff

Jesus’ biggest enemy is Christians. They cost him followers every time they open their mouths.

John Mason

By George, I think Gandhi said something quite similar! RIGHT ON! The was a Prophet who killed a ton of people with the jawbone of an ass. We still have that happening from so many pulpits today!

leecappella

I don’t think Jesus cares about one’s religious affiliation. Being a Christian doesn’t inherit one life. God is no respecter of persons. Therefore, if anyone (gay, straight, black, white, male, female, Jew, Gentile, Christian etc.) is a doer of the Law of loving thy neighbor as thyself, they will inherit life (Matthew 19:16-19).

James Nimmons

which lord? if you have an aster them you too are part of a religion

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Not really. I’m a Christian but only spiritually. I belong to no religion.

James Nimmons

christianity is great when you eliminate the bible from it…

geno

Glad to see you’re coming to K.C.! My partner of 36 years and I, have been in this area for ten years. We like it a lot. We’re not church-goers at all … but near our home (on the KS side), there’s a totally open and affirming UCC congregation.

Sharla Hulsey

There is also a similarly open and affirming congregation of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) there, St. Andrew’s Christian Church in Olathe (I think it’s Olathe). Their pastor blogs on Patheos as “Irreverin.”

This guy is awesome, and showing true Christianity, which is love, and fellowship.

simon seivwright

I think your incorrect when you say that its true Christianity to not rebuke or admit that an act is not right in the sight of God. Its no problem to minister without prejudice but to not tell one that their actions are sinful are in the same sense a sin.

Nemesis_Nexus

and I think if “god” was really that concerned about gay marriage he would not have made gay people to begin with.

I grew up Methodist. I don’t remember all this evangelical stuff nor do I remember “divine retribution”. The church I grew up in was less concerned about going to heaven than it was about living life well on the earth God had given us. I didn’t know about the rapture or Armageddon. I was raised with the idea that service was important – that how you treated your fellow man was important & I was taught not to judge. It WAS a liberal religion. What the HELL happened?
Good for Rev Schaefer. He put his children first. I bet his congregation still likes him. Wonder who “despicable me” was who just couldn’t let it go & HAD to file charges against him. A church who denies a clergyman the right to perform marriages as they see fit certainly ISN’T a place all people want to be. Glad I am no longer a Methodist – they don’t seem to be the wonderful church & people of my youth.

Meredith Stuart Parvin

my quite radical theologian methodist pastor at this church has made progress being that in his first assignment after being ordained he began moving past his homophobia because of someone in his ongregration. He has turned down officiating or encouraging gay marriage with the rationale he would lose his ordainment. THis doesnt seem to fit any theology he has championed, the christ he helped us all invision was a liborator especially in place of discomfort.
Hesitation and holding back from God’s love overwelming us is the worst thing we can do. It doesn’t just hurt us it hurts others. I am transgender and feel stigma in the church. although i have loved all the methodist churchs i have called home it makes no sense that gay marriage can be compromised like this. I used to be against gay marriage. If the church for religious reasons really postulates then that should be seperate from the state, who legally should recognize every citizens right. I educated my relgious and legal opinion. I asked god about if i should get married, a surgery, what a marriage was and in listening I realized my situation is unique. God made me special, so although most of my answers are “no” and marriage is “complicated legal entanglement in front of your commmunity and God” others need the freedom and equality to do the same.

lexlibris8

I grew up Episcopalian and don’t remember it either. Now it’s in our church too. If you figure it out, tell me.

If you think that Jesus christ is one that tolerates any action within the church, I see you have been misinformed.He said he never came to bring peace but a sword,he came to make the clear distinction between righteous and the unrighteous,good and evil,men against men,women against women,child against mother. though the church must love all they, must make a clear distinction between sin and Godliness. So before one joins the church they MUST turn from sinful ways(things that are considered wrong in the eyes of God). LOVE ALL but TURN THEM AWAY IF THEY ARE NOT WILLING TO CHANGE OR ACCEPT WHAT YOU PREACH.

Sera Varlane

You might need to stop and wonder at this point why people are turning away from churches. Not everybody is bound to the same faith as you. Frankly, if you’re going to be so concerned with going to Hell, I’m apt to believe you’re headed there.

You have no right to condemn others to the same fate as your sorry book. If you’re going to obsess over one single passage that can be interpreted many ways, I feel sorry for you. I suppose you don’t eat shellfish and all that bullshit, and don’t you dare tell me ‘We don’t follow those rules anymore’, because if you don’t you’d back the Hell off of the LGBT community.

I stand behind this man. I stand behind love. You make me sick, Simon. See you in Hell, sweetheart.

bomber

I agree with you. I also grew up Methodist and have the same recollections. However, I’m not inclined to step foot in any church these days as organized religion seems to be more of a business model than places of God.

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

That is 1 thing I like about being a U U. UUs believe that there are many paths & that people must decide for themselves what they believe. Unitarian was the faith of many of our founding fathers. They believed in GOD but not in the divinity of Jesus…as a matter of fact, Jefferson wrote his own bible & took all the references to Jesus miracles (including the virgin birth) out. We also believe in studying ALL the world’s religions because if we can understand other’s belief, we can at least try to understand. It takes the mystery out too. We try to see more of why we are alike than why we are different.
My hubby is atheist as are a few other UUs I know.

tccstend

The Methodist Church is a wonderful organization. I say that as an ally and not as a member. This kind of thing only happens when people run instead of exercising ownership. Methodist peace and justice history is amazing. Don’t let the criminals destroy what amazing people created.

tccstend

You have been taken over by the Institute on Religion and Democracy. Your Deaconess have been fired all over the country. People in the pews need to take their church back instead of whining. We’re having the same problems in the Episcopal Church…same damn organization is the source of the trouble.

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

Our Deaconess? U Us have no deacons, no elders & no one in authority. We even have female pastors…Our interim minister is female & older. No one in our church is whining. When I was growing up, we didn’t spend much time on the President’s religion (or even lack thereof). The only flack & fall out I recall was when Kennedy had to swear that he would use the constitution as his guidebook rather than Rome & the Pope. It isn’t an organization. It is evangelical religion – the kind that is saying nothing is religious enough or conservative enough. PEOPLE need to take back the power at the voting booth – not in the church.

tccstend

I’m sorry for confusing you. My response was to Methodists. My bad.

http://bajageoff.webs.com/ geoffinbaja

I admire Rev. Schaefer for following his beliefs. However I think his next course has to be to find a church with which he shares beliefs.
It is one thing to remain in the Methodist church and trying to change the rules, while still adhering to them. If attempts to have the rules changed fails, or to persuade the church that your beliefs are not contrary to those rules fails, exit is the only honorable course.

Ann Hartley

When searching for a Christian church for my family after decades of absence I chose the Methodist church. It took a stand then as a proudly liberal institution. Even during the 10 years I attended my church I saw it becoming increasingly rigid and judgmental. I am distressed by its current stance on many issues. Thank Goodness for the Religious Society of Friends!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/316619855247/ TMills

I am sorry~ But didn’t Jesus Christ live his life as a pulpier, feeding the hungry, healing the sick. Is it also not said that He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone? We are responsible for our OWN ACTIONS~ I haven’t ever read anything in the bible where Jesus says to turn anyone away, if anything, he tells us to turn the other cheek!

PT

TMills- READ
Mark 10:17-31.

The man who met Jesus here, turned away dismayed. Jesus spoke straight to his heart about the issue he had, that was preventing him from entering eternal life. Unless he could meet Jesus’ requirements he clearly could not receive eternal life.

Jesus doesn’t turn people away. But he most definitely requires them to be obedient to his teaching. It is not popular for Christians to preach obedience to Christ, by laying your life down, picking up the cross and following Christ daily. But this is the true gospel, straight from the mouth of Jesus. It is not just our sexuality that Jesus asks for Lordship over, it is every part of our lives.

It is this fact that people find most offensive. Whilst many people may be preaching a message of, “It’s ok to do what you want as long as you don’t hurt anyone.” They often forget to take God into the equation. WHAT IF WHAT YOU DO HURTS GOD? Is it still ok to do it then?

https://www.facebook.com/groups/316619855247/ TMills

The man turned away from Jesus, Jesus didn’t turn away.

So maybe you should re-read that scripture. As far as your last comment, isn’t that between Jesus and each and every one of us? Maybe if we quit pointing the fingers at others, looked into the mirror, “If we would judge ourselves we would not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world.” (1 Corinthians 11:31-32).

Betsy

Hurting God’s people hurts God. THAT is how you hurt God. God is God, He is omnipotent and there is very little as humans that we can do to hurt His actual Self. Hurting other people is what hurts God-it’s an attack on His children. THIS IS HURTING GOD.

Sally

So you’re positive that what shows up in red ink in your translation are the exact words of Jesus? Good for you. I find myself a bit more skeptical, since so many people over the centuries have had a hand (and an agenda) in writing and rewriting this book, not to mention the myriad of translations. Jesus did not speak English. Or Greek. And if you remember the telephone game you played as kids, humans do not do a very good job at recording events, let alone individual words. So yes, you can no doubt find phrases to support your beliefs. I just don’t think they are necessarily words from the mouth of Jesus.

Bill

You appear to be missing the point, that it is not up to man, but to God, to not only determine what is or is not offensive to Him, but to deal with it.

Dominique Storni

I stand with this Pastor. I also rebuke the church for un-Christlike behavior. And I do so because I have the perfect precedent. Jesus also rebuked the political and religious leaders of His day. Jesus called them to repentance.

Churches who refuse to follow Jesus, and follow their own dogma, rhetoric, and hatred… I rebuke you and call you to repentance.

leecappella

Indeed! Jesus and the religious leaders of his day were at odds with one another for various reasons. One of which being that the Jews believed they were accepted by God because they lived by the law of Moses. Thus, they believed everyone had to become a Jew. Sounds like some Christians:) Whereas, Jesus taught, to be accepted by God, one had to keep the commandments based on loving thy neighbor as thyself (Matthew 19:16-19). This is how one inherits life.

PT

Actually Lee, Jesus taught that the only way to the Father was through him, and his death on the cross. He also taught us that to follow him we must lay down our life, pick up our cross and follow him. This laying down our life is the total submission of your will to the Father. It says in essence, YOU ARE LORD AND I AM NOT. NOT MY WILL BE DONE BUT YOURS. Jesus modeled the life perfectly. It is not simply our sexuality that we must submit to God, it is every aspect of our lives.

leecappella

I’m sorry, PT. What was Jesus’ answer to how one inherits life when he was asked in Matthew 19:16-19?

PT

ANSWER: Jesus answer was. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

Jesus teaches us that no person can enter eternal life but the one who is perfect. Jesus,God himself, is the only one who is perfect.

He teaches that in order to inherit eternal life we must obey all the commandments. The young rich man is supremely confident that he has done this since childhood. It is to this confidence that Jesus give the following instruction.

“If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

Jesus used this command to reveal the mans heart. The man ‘s God was actually his wealth. He had broken the very first commandment. The man went away dismayed because he could not obey Jesus.

The reality is, none of us can keep the law, we all stumble. The way to eternal life is through the Son. The way to follow the Son is by his example, we die to ourselves. Whoever loses his life for Christs sake, finds eternal life.

leecappella

Thanks for answering, PT. I don’t see this story the same as you do. First, I don’t believe that Jesus would answer the question with, “…keep the commandments” if the commandments weren’t capable of being kept. That would make no sense to me. Where I think you’re coming from is that you’re thinking of the law of Moses and all of its many rules and regulations and you’re saying that all of THOSE commandments are not capable of being kept. If that is what you’re saying, I agree with you. However, the law of Moses and its commandments are not what I believe Jesus is referring to when he answers the man’s question of how a person can inherit life. The law of Moses and its various commandments are not the commandments Jesus is telling the man that he must keep. Jesus’ answer tells the man (and us) which commandments need to be kept in order to inherit life: “…Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, honor thy mother and father…” All of these are examples of loving thy neighbor as thyself. If there is any other law or commandment that needs to be kept, the bible says it also is summed up in love thy neighbor as thyself. My mother once told me that she didn’t know if she should be going to church on Saturday or on Sunday. She wanted to live by the bible. Well, I told her that it doesn’t matter. That’s because it’s not something that has anything to do with what really matters, which is making sure we are keeping the commandments that do matter, which are ONLY those based on loving thy neighbor as thyself.

I agree that Jesus saw the rich man’s heart and how the man was too attached to what he possessed. Thus, the difficulty of a rich man entering heaven. You see this rich man as making wealth his god, which very well may be the case. And, to you, the rich man is breaking the first commandment by making wealth his god. For me, however, it’s more so the case of the rich man being so attached to what he possessed that it’s keeping him from loving his neighbor as thyself. His attachment to things makes it difficult for him to share his wealth when there are others in need. You’re not loving your neighbor as if they were you if you’re not wiling to give to people in need. As a result of this, a rich man is breaking the ONLY Law that matters: to love others as thyself. Obviously, the man was not ready because he walked away thinking about all that he had to give away and he seemingly did not want to give it away. Things were more important to him than people. Jesus saw this as things being more important to him than God because when you love your neighbor, you are loving God. The rich man was not ready to love God via loving people in the way the Law required. That’s how I see it.

I agree, none of us can keep the law of Moses. But, we are capable of loving others. The commandments based on loving thy neighbor as thyself are the ones I believe Jesus was telling the man to keep after the man asked, “Which ones?” That is why Jesus gave the man examples of such commandments. The Jews divided the law of Moses into two groups: Jobs and Justices. The Jobs were the commands people did for religious reasons and devotions. The Justices were the rest of the commands, which are all based on loving thy fellow man. Paul spoke about this to prideful Jews in the book of Romans when he used homosexual pagan rituals as an example of what is a Job versus how the Jews were guilty of mistreating others (Romans 1:28-32), which were violations of the Justices (ie. the commands based on loving thy neighbor as thyself).

I don’t believe that Jesus gave a round about answer. He was asked a question and he answered it with the answer to the question asked. How does one inherit life? He (or she) must keep the commandments based on loving thy neighbor as thyself. I believe this is supported in Matthew chapter 25 where Jesus describes who the righteous are and who the unrighteous are. Note, the righteous are not righteous because they are Christians. That is not what determines one as a righteous person. It is because they were altruistic, benevolent, and loving towards their neighbor. That is why they are the righteous. Jesus sees the righteous as loving God because they loved their neighbor, who are made in God’s image.

I do not deny that eternal life is through the Son. Jesus is the Savior of ALL mankind. However, if a person considers themselves a follower of Jesus, they will keep the commands based on loving thy neighbor as thyself. If they do not, they are not following Jesus because they are not doing what he said to do to inherit life. A homosexual is capable of keeping the necessary commandments of the Law because being a homosexual does not break any commandment based on loving thy neighbor as thyself.

John Mason

I would strongly recommend to PT and others with similar views to view a YouTube video by Matthew Vines and the Reformation Project:

We can debate what the Bible says about gay people until the cows come home. American Christians ESPECIALLY have a very westernized, and therefore not Biblical view of MOST things sexual when they interpret the Bible.

For those genuinely seeking enlightenment, Matthew’s video, and others like it, are a good alternative view of what the Bible says or doesn’t say about same sex attraction and love. Same sex love is as unheard of in the Bible as space exploration and open heart surgery. Choosing sexual activity of any kind, homosexual, asexual, pansexual, heterosexual, intersexual, or any other kind in an attempt to deny God or go against God is a choice people made in the Romans One account. Romans describes sexual behavior that is similar to a child rebelling against a parent. It has to do with choice. People used sex to throw a tantrum against God.

Same sex attraction and love has nothing to do with that choice, OR with Romans One. Romans One is about using human sexuality intentionally (notice they “CHOSE”) against God. It is not about people who are constitutionally gay. It is not about same sex attraction and love. It is about hating God and using sex to prove it. Many do the same thing with the Story of Lot and the attempted rape of the messengers in his home. To infer that these stories are about same sex attraction and love is to do disservice to the Text and to LGBTQ people.

Again, watch this video. Open your heart. Theology without heart is not the theology of Jesus. It is the theology of the Pharisee and the judge who thank God “they are not as other men (LGBTQ persons?) are.” ~Pastor John

PT

Jesus doesn’t turn people away. But he most definitely requires them to be obedient to his teaching. It is not popular for Christians to preach obedience to Christ, by laying your life down, picking up the cross and following Christ daily. But this is the true gospel, straight from the mouth of Jesus. It is not just our sexuality that Jesus asks for Lordship over, it is every part of our lives.

It is this fact that people find most offensive. Whilst many people may be preaching a message of, “It’s ok to do what you want as long as you don’t hurt anyone.” They often forget to take God into the equation. WHAT IF WHAT YOU DO HURTS GOD? Is it still ok to do it then?

George Colom

I agrre with some of your statements here except one, most of what Christ said was written later by men, who did also include their opinions, so forgive me for not taking everything at heart, remember when you do wrong you know it right there and then in your heart, the fact that many continue is because they will lie to themselves, once you cross that line it is very difficult to go back, for you do not trust your judgement.I was raised a catholic, but when I saw all the hypocrites at church on Sunday, it left me thinking, so I stepped away.

Ralph Hitchens

The only Biblical proscription against homosexuality is in Leviticus, an oral tradition codified into the Law more than 2,000 years ago to govern the behavior of a group of people who, prior to that time, had no real ethnic or cultural identity or anything to bind them together. The Lawgiver handed down (in addition to the Ten Commandments, which say nothing about homosexuality) a long list of laws, most of which we have discarded over subsequent centuries as we gained more scientific knowledge. So we enjoy eating shrimp and lobster, we have no problem mixing fabrics in a garment, see not a thing wrong with sowing a field with different crops, and we certainly don’t stone people caught in adultery — Jesus had the last word on that one. But somehow, while blithely ignoring so many of those laws in Leviticus, we are absolutely convinced that the proscription against homosexuality still represents God’s Will and must be enforced. This despite knowing, as virtually all scientists agree, that homosexuality is biological, not a “lifestyle choice.” Since homosexuals are as God made them, it goes without saying that toleration of homosexuality cannot hurt God. It’s long past the time to end the hypocrisy of “cafeteria Christianity” and learn to tolerate homosexuality along with the joy we find in eating at Red Lobster.

PT

quote: virtually all scientists agree, that homosexuality is biological, not a “lifestyle choice.” So the Lesbian Biology teacher my friend works with is mistaken. She says, “There is no such thing as the Gay Gene, IT IS A CHOICE.” How does that fit in with your sweeping statement that virtually all scientists agree?

Also Answer me this: Do you decide what is clean or unclean because, “we gained more scientific knowledge.” Or because God deemed it so in the new covenant?

Ralph Hitchens

Sad to say, your friend the Lesbian Biology Teacher is wrong. She should do a little more research — same-sex attraction even crosses species boundaries, i.e., is found elsewhere in nature. It truly must be part of God’s plan. Anecdotaly (like your teacher friend) the many gay people I have known I really can’t believe could be any other way. They didn’t choose it; it was chosen for them.

Bill

I can tell you firsthand that it’s not a choice, I tried to die daily
throughout my teens, wanting to just be “normal” and “a real man” –
fortunately, also with the deep desire that it not LOOK like suicide, so
no one would ever find out why. Care to guess how many teen suicides
are thus inspired?

More than that, though, the National
Institutes of Health determined in 1992 that there are physical
differences in the brain… The hypothalamus and anterior commissure of
a gay person resemble those of the opposite gender, not their own.

I can tell you firsthand that it’s not a choice, I tried to die daily throughout my teens, wanting to just be “normal” and “a real man” (and I only had “tendencies,” couldn’t help but find some guys attractive) – fortunately, also with the deep desire that it not LOOK like suicide, so no one would ever find out why. Care to guess how many teen suicides are thus inspired, though? We might never know.

More than that, though, the National Institutes of Health officially determined in 1992 that there are physical differences in the brain… The hypothalamus and anterior commissure of a gay person resemble those of the opposite gender, not their own.

The latest research indicates there is no specifc “gay gene” but that there is the ability for the expression to turn on and off depending on the environment of the fetus or even further back than that – the egg….the same way as your genetic expression for a tail turns on and off – all humans have the ability to grow one, it just doesn’t, usually, turn on except in rare cases. The expression is a capability of all creatures. It determines whether or not a chicken grows teeth or scales or a lizard grows feathers or a beak or a human grows a tail or thick fur or a thumb instead of a finger….

QUOTE. “The only Biblical proscription against homosexuality is in Leviticus.”

So Romans description of un-natural relations is not relevant? Just to name one other passage.

Look, most Atheist gay people would read the bible and find it overwhelmingly obvious that God says that a homosexual lifestyle is not in line with his commands. To read the bible and see it otherwise is ludicrous.

Ralph Hitchens

PT, I differentiate between passages containing “thus sayeth the Lord” like those in Leviticus, or similar language directly invoking God, and passages written by, for example, Saint Paul — a man of God but as he himself declared any number of times, NOT God. Paul didn’t have much use for sex in any form, so what he said in Romans is nothing more than his own opinion.

PT

Ralph. This is actually an error you have made. Even the apostle Peter recognized that the letters and writing of Paul were scripture. We know that all scripture is God breathed and good for teaching. INCLUDING the writing of Paul.

2 Peter 3 vs 15 and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our
beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in
which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and
unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their
own destruction.

Ralph Hitchens

You’re making assumptions equating your beliefs with absolute truth, the classic fundamentalist error. Of course not all scripture is “God breathed and good for teaching,” else we would be observant of all the long-discarded proscriptions in Leviticus. (And virtually no New Testament scholar worthy of serious consideration believes that the letters of Peter were composed by the Apostle Peter.) As John Wesley preached, we must look first to scripture, but also consider tradition, experience, and reason. We are, as God made us, reasoning creatures and would be fools not to use this gift.

leecappella

PT, there is only one Law which sums up all laws and commands: love thy neighbor as thyself. You’re too focused on the ‘unnatural’ness of homosexuality as if something being ‘unnatural’ automatically means sin. ‘Unnatural’ does not mean sin when used by Paul in Romans chapter 1, nor when it’s used in Romans 11:24 about grafting. Paul, in Romans, is actually letting prideful Jews know that they need to repent from their way of thinking.

You see, Jews, for the most part, believed that they were in right standing with God for just being Jews. Being a Jew meant following the law of Moses and all of the commands within that law, like getting circumcised, among other many things. However, Jesus came along and answered the question of how does one inherit life. His answer was not one must be a Jew, nor was it that one must be a Christian. Jesus’ answer was “keep the commandments”. The man asking the question asked Jesus, “Which commandments?” (paraphrasing) You see, the Jews divided the law of Moses into two groups: Jobs and Justices. The Jobs were the commands between man and God (ie. things people do for religious reasons, devotions, etc.). The Justices were the commands between man and his neighbor. Another way to describe the Jobs would be those commands that have nothing to do with how you treated your neighbor. The Justices, however, had everything to do with how you treated your neighbor. Jesus discarded the Jobs and only declared the Justices to be Law. That is why his answer, in Matthew 19:18, were examples of the Justices or examples of loving thy neighbor as thyself, which is the summation of ALL laws/commands.

If you’re still focused on the notion that homosexuality is condemned in the bible, I’d say you’re not considering the Leviticus passages to be referencing the same things the Romans chapter 1 passages are referencing, which is pagan idolatrous rituals that involved homosexual acts. Thus, the changing of God into images of man and earthly creatures. Paul used something that he knew the Jews looked down on (ie. homosexuality) and he used it let the Jews know that homosexuality is nothing compared to what the Jews were guilty of, which was their continual mistreatment of their neighbor. In various ways, Paul was trying to get it across to the Jews, as I am trying to get across to you, that homosexuality falls under the Jobs category (ie. something people did for religious reasons, devotions, etc.) It has nothing to do with how you treat people. That is to say, it does not prevent a person from being a doer of the Law of loving thy neighbor as thyself (Romans 2:13). Paul used a Job (ie. homosexual rituals in pagan temples) to compare it to what really mattered (ie. the Justices) to show his audience that what matters on judgement day is how you treat people.

You can call homosexuality unnatural, but it doesn’t violate the one and ONLY Law of Christ, which is loving thy neighbor as thyself. Putting holes in one’s ear is unnatural, but it doesn’t violate the Law of loving thy neighbor as thyself. In one of Paul’s examples to show how the Jobs didn’t matter anymore, he told the Jews that an uncircumcised man that keeps the righteousness of the Law will be seen as if he were circumcised. To a Jew, an uncircumcised man can’t be keepign the righteousness of the law because, to a most Jews, the law requires circumcision. Paul is talking about two different laws: the law of Moses, which required circumcision and the Law of Christ, which says only the Justices are the Law, not any Job, such as circumcision. Basically, if an uncircumcised man loves others, is equitable, altruistic, and benevolent via his character, he inherits life. How many gay men do you know like this. They do exist!

PT

leecappella . To read this passage any other way than the plainly obvious condemnation of homosexual sexual relations, is simply to deceive one’s-self.

Romans 1 vs 24 onward
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In
the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and
were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts
with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their
error.

PT

Don’t get me wrong, I most certainly do would not advocate any form of prejudice or hate, toward people who are practicing homosexuals. It’s not my business to tell people how to live their lives. But there is no way I can read the bible and somehow twist it to say that this is Gods will! That would be deceitful of me. Its very plain and simple. Jesus himself says , “in the beginning he created them male and female.”

The concept of marriage goes much deeper than just at the human level. It is a mirror of Christ and His church. It is not for us to tell God how it should be. I know it’s not politically correct, but thats how it is. God is God. Not us. Now If I have no business telling people how to live their lives, in the same way, no person has the right to make me change my belief in God commands.

Sally

I didn’t realize that Jesus narrated Genesis.

And no, one one can change your beliefs. By the inverse is also true. You have no right to change another’s beliefs, nor their interpretation of a book that has been edited and rewritten countless times over the centuries, often at the behest of a ruler with an agenda. The Paulian critiques of women only appeared with the King James version. Are you saying that women must be silent and not preach? Because Jesus never said that, only Paul supposedly did. I find it fascinating that so much space is given to what women shouldn’t do, while there is no mention of men not raping, abusing, or killing. The only real teaching we have is one that appears in every religion: Treat others as you would be treated. The NT boils down to that for me.

PT

Quote. I didn’t realize that Jesus narrated Genesis.

I don’t understand your point? This is a quote from Jesus in the new testament. I am not claiming he narrated Genesis?

http://bajageoff.webs.com/ geoffinbaja

PT If you oppose marriage equality you are telling people how to live their lives. Personally I believe the State should deal only with the legal aspects of marriage and leave the Church(es) to define the aspects which are “deeper than just the human level”. The recognition of, and practice of easy, divorce and concepts such as pre nuptual agreements have debased the sacramental (for want of a better word) nature of marriage.

PT

geoffinbaja
QUOTE. “PT If you oppose marriage equality you are telling people how to live their lives” Where have I said that I am doing this? If people want to do that, then it’s no business of mine to stop them. According to the bible God created and defined marriage. Should two men or two women wish to marry one another then It is no business of mine to stop them, but you have to use very unusual hermeneutics to claim the bible is pro gay marriage. Gay people are perfectly free to do as they please, even to claim that God is blessing their marriage. But that “god’ is clearly not the God in the Christian bible.

http://bajageoff.webs.com/ geoffinbaja

Forgive me PT. I thought you opposed the legalization of marriage equality. If I am incorrect in that belief I apologize and thank you for supporting it. (based on the flip side of “if you are not for me you are against me”).
On re-reading your comments I see that you were addressing the issue of whether it is contrary to the bible. I have a view on that but it is better expressed by others more knowledgeable than I in matters of the bible.

PT

Geoff, I firmly believe that God gave free will to mankind, I also believe that He will judge every person that has ever lived by his standard. In Paul’s writing we see that we cannot expect people who do not know God, to follow his laws. It is for this reason that I would never oppose people’s choice to marry, if they are Gay.

Never the less this is not in line with the instruction of scripture. I would therefore defend to the utmost the truth of scripture regarding this choice. I have heard, most probably, all the explanations that try to dismiss scripture on this matter. Yet non of them convince me, and some are blatantly distorting the very words of truth. This is no surprise as scripture itself teaches us that this very twisting of the truth, is a part of the last days.

Robyn Ryan

How can you ‘hurt’ God?

By definition, he can’t be hurt. if he’s a god. Frankly, I find the Jewish Yahweh of the Old Testament a perverted, bloody handed sociopath. Who slaughtered whole nations because he was peeved. Ugh. I wouldn’t date him, much less worship his self-absorbed self.

And I thought Jesus died to save people from Yahweh’s hurt feelings over Jewish non-compliance with his sadistic demands. So why go for the Moses deal with Yahweh instead of Jesus’? Classic abuser signs in this relationship..

And I’m still trying to work out the puzzle. If Jesus is God, did God send himself to ‘redeem’ people from his own wrath? And why then and there?

Remember. The greatest virtue is Charity, which includes empathy for others. Being charitable means treating people the way you’d want to be treated.

leecappella

What hurts God is sin. Sin, to God, is that which violates the Law that Jesus said inherits one life in the age to come: love thy neighbor as thyself. If you follow this Law, you do well and sin not. If you violate this Law, you are sinning. Is being gay or being in a gay relationship a violation of this Law? No. It seems simple, but I understand some might need time to get it. I did:)

WinnieMe

PT: What, exactly, did Jesus say about same-sex love? Answer: NOT ONE THING. Jesus said “Beloved, let us LOVE ONE ANOTHER, for LOVE is OF GOD, and those who love are born of God and know God. Those who LOVE NOT do NOT know God.” THAT is what JESUS said.

PT

Romans 1 vs 24 onward
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful
desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their
bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a
lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who
is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to
shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for
unnatural ones. 27 In
the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and
were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts
with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their
error.

Even the apostle Peter recognized that the letters and writing of
Paul were scripture. We know that all scripture is God breathed and good
for teaching. INCLUDING the writing of Paul.

2 Peter 3 vs 15 and regard the patience of our Lord to be salvation; just as also our
beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in
which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and
unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their
own destruction.

WinnieMe

Jesus: “This is my commandment, that you love one another… the greatest commandment is this; that you love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself…let he who has not sinned cast the first stone…
God must love gay people; he sure creates a lot of them, and always has. I don’t think anything you or I can do can “hurt God.” How we treat one another can, however come between us and God.
It is not up to you or to me to judge someone’s heart. As a marriage and family counselor, I see plenty of heterosexual couples that hurt one another and do damage to the body of Christ through their behavior.

Matthew Williamson

God must love murderers because He sure creates a lot of them. He must love adulterers because He sure creates a lot of them. God must love thieves because He sure creates a lot of them. Your right though, He does love them, but He hates their sin because sin if what separates God and man and which is why Jesus Christ came and died on the cross for us. Not so that we could continue in sin but so that we could be set free.

leecappella

Yes. God does love murderers, adulterers, and thieves. God, however, does not love their sin, which represents and violates the Law that is based on love, benevolence, altruism, kindness, and brotherly love.

Murderers are in violation because taking another person’s life is not an act of love. It is an act of mistreatment and harm to an image of God. It is the opposite of benevolence, altruism, kindness, and brotherly love.

Adulterers are in violation because they break the marriage vow they made to their spouse, which is a mistreatment of that relationship and marriage. Adultery is a hurtful act which harms the spouse. It’s the breaking of a covenant and is the opposite of benevolence, altruism, kindness, and brotherly love.

Thieves are in violation because they show no concern for another person or the other person’s things. It is a selfish act which reveals a lack of love for one’s fellow man. People who steal from other people, I’m sure, would not like it nor want someone to steal from them, yet they steal and treat others in a way that they, themselves, would not want to be treated. Thievery is an act opposite benevolence, altruism, kindness, and brotherly love.

All IMHO.

leecappella

In Romans, Paul was trying to convey to the Jews that because the commandments based on brotherly love are the Law and the ONLY Law, circumcision is no longer a commandment of God. He’s telling them that the Jobs or works of the law of Moses no longer apply. Only the Justices (ie. commands based on love thy neighbor as thyself) are the Law. Paul, in Romans, is also using the example of homosexual ritual orgies to make this very point. Because the homosexual ritual orgies that Paul references in chapter one of Romans were things some people engaged in for religious reason and/or devotions, they were categorized as Jobs or works. Because the commandments that are based on brotherly love are the only commandments to follow, the old testament prohibitions on what cannot be eaten no longer apply. Certain foods that were called abominations are no longer abominations. The same applies to homosexual acts done in pagan temples, which were also called abominations. No works of the law of Moses (ie. no Job) are required to be kept because only the commandments based on brotherly love are the Law, making the Jobs or works of the law irrelevant (Romans 3:20).

PT

Lee. There is a huge difference between what was Kosher and not kosher. And the use of the term Unnatural relations. This hermeneutic of Romans, that you describe, is warped. This is my exact point. Only by twisting the meaning of scripture can people claim that God is pro Gay marriage. We know from several scriptures that the rules governing the old testament covenant of Kosher have been fulfilled completely in Christ. The same can not be said of homosexual sexual relationships or sexual promiscuity of any kinds. This does not just apply to people who are Gay, as if God is somehow singling them out. This applies to all humankind, all those that have sex outside of Gods specific plan for sex.

leecappella

Hi, PT. It’s only warped to those who are not aware of certain things. You cannot add to the one and only Law, nor subtract from it. There is only one Law and Jesus established it as the Law above all other laws. In the examples that Jesus gave in Matthew 19:18-19, we can see that the intent of the Law is to prevent humans from mistreating their fellow man in various ways that are the opposite of benevolence, altruism, kindness, and love. The assertion that a gay person cannot enter heaven is, to me, incorrect in light of what the Law requires. Especially, if the gay person does, indeed, keep the Law. Like the uncircumcised man in Romans 2:26, a gay person’s homosexuality will be counted as heterosexuality? Although Paul says, in Romans chapter two, that the uncircumcised man’s obedience to the Law will result in his uncircumcision being counted as circumcision, he’s not saying circumcision is required. Circumcision does not hinder a person from practicing the Law of loving their fellow man with a benevolent and altruistic character. Therefore, it is unnecessary and the Law no longer required it to be kept, per Paul’s example. This would be applicable to any command in the law of Moses the fell under the catogory of things people do for God out of devotional reasons (ie. works of the law, Romans 3:20). Homosexuality falls under this category, just like circumcision does.

Homosexuality does not hinder a person from practicing and keeping the requirements of the Law. Therefore, it was no longer required to put people to death for partaking in pagan rituals that involved homosexuality, as was the case in levitical law and in Romans chapter one. Paul was a Jew. He knew what the Jewish law said about many things, including same sex acts. However, he was also aware that Jesus no longer required the commands between man and God to be kept. Only the neighbor based commands were Law, per Jesus (Matthew 19:16-19), As a result, Paul didn’t call certain things sin that Christians today might call sin, due to their ignorance of what the Law requires and does not require. Instead, Paul measured things by the Law of loving thy neighbor. If it violated that Law, it was sin. If it did not violate that Law, it was up to the individual to decide. Paul did mention how ALL things are lawful, but not all things are beneficial or expedient. This is how it was with the Law of liberty. Liberty because we have been freed from unnecessary religious rules and regulations. The only Law is the one Jesus told the man in Matthew 19:16-19. The only commandments to be kept are the ones that fall under the Law and it neighbor based commands. Commands similar to do not steal, do not commit adultery, do not covet, and any other command that ensures that we love and treat our fellow man in the way we would want to be treated.

If you say, yes, I agree that we should love our neighbor as we love ourselves, but no gay person will be in heaven, then, I say, you have missed the point of everything I am saying. You fail to see that you are mistreating your gay neighbor who is within the guidelines of the Law as a person who simply loves another human being that happens to be of the same gender. Much, in the same way that a heterosexual person is within the guidelines of the Law who loves another of the opposite gender. You seem to fail to see that God is no respecter of persons. Whosoever believes in the name of Jesus via doing what he said to do to inherit life, they will be saved. Even a gay person who keeps the requirements of the Law by loving his fellow man as the Law requires. If, in your mind, a gay person has to do something other than love thy neighbor as thyself, which is the only requirement, then what you would be saying is that the the gay person has to love thy neighbor as thyself AND be either heterosexual or celibate. That would be adding to the list of what the Law requires when it was never a requirement of the newly established Law.

I do understand your last paragraph, but, again, sin is only that which violates the Law I have described above and elsewhere, IMHO. Once you discern between the commands that people believe they should do for religious reasons that have nothing to do with how you treat your neighbor versus the commands that actually are based on how you treat your neighbor, you will see, hopefully, that sin is only those things that break the commands that are only based on how you treat your neighbor. That is because how you treat your neighbor is seen by Jesus as how you are treating Jesus, which is why it’s the Law to love everyone as you love yourself. When you don’t, you are seen as mistreating and not loving God ‘himself’.

I know I have another post of yours to respond to. I plan to do so. Have a great day!

PT

HI Lee, Sorry I haven’t replied sooner. Work has prevailed.

With regards to your assertion that,

“If you say, yes, I agree that we should love our neighbor as we love ourselves, but no gay person will be in heaven, then, I say, you have missed the point of everything I am saying. You fail to see that you are mistreating your gay neighbor who is within the guidelines of the Law as a person who simply loves another human being that happens to be of the same gender. Much, in the same way that a heterosexual person is within the guidelines of the Law who loves another of the opposite gender. You seem to fail to see that God is no respecter of persons.”

Lets consider the possibility that my interpretation of scripture is actually correct, and that the most logical and plain reading of the text is, in actual fact, correct. If this is true then to teach people that God is absolutely fine with active practicing homosexual relationships, would be harmful if not deceptive to them. This would place us in the position warned by Jesus in

Mark 9:42

If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.

Therefore The inverse to your assertion would be true.

As I have written elsewhere, when reading the scripture regarding this subject I can only find one conclusion.

leecappella

Hi, PT.

No worries. I certainly understand about work and free time:) Now on to my response:

I believe what you are saying to me is that if your view is the correct view that God holds, then my view would be one in which would be harmful and a stumbling block to those who are homosexual. I would agree with you on that point, but only if I had my current view of the issue AND, at the same time, only if I knew, with 100% certainty, that God was opposed to homosexuality. Being who I am, I would never teach or say that God is okay with homosexuality if I knew, without a doubt, that God was opposed to homosexuality. However, as the case currently is, I don’t have that certainty that God feels that way. I am more certain that God does not feel that way than I am that God does feel that way. The only way that I would know for sure (with no doubts) would be if God told me directly. There would have to be no doubt that God was telling me as well as no question about misinterpretation in what I was hearing. Fortunately, or unfortunately, when it comes to the bible’s written text, misinterpretations can occur. Especially, when the texts are not written in their original language and words have various meanings in one culture and another meaning in another culture. There are also various persons in the world who make it a living to study the bible, how it came into existence, and various other things related to the bible like what believers originally believed centuries before believes in our day and time came along. The information that we have access to has to be considered and it varies from person to person. I may read things you don’t and they shape what I believe. You read things that I may not have read and they shape your beliefs. Ultimately, no matter what you hear or what I hear, we both have to decide what we believe (regardless of what others believe).

When I was very little, I believed whatever I was told, I am totally the opposite of that now, as an adult. I believe you have to look into things yourself because we have a mind of our own. This does not mean that we don’t believe in God. It just means that people have different perceptions of God and God’s character. I find it very difficult to believe that God would create a vast number of humans and expect each and every one of them to believe exactly the same way. It’s difficult to get five people to believe exactly the same way:) As a result of knowing this, it’s not what you believe that gets you immediate entrance into heaven. Instead, it’s how you treat people that will get you there immediately. Everyone’s going to end up there, ultimately. Each in their own order. However, to get there immediately (avoiding the wrath), keeping the commandments of the Law is what inherits a person life in the age to come, as Jesus says in Matthew 19:17-19. We each have conclusions. Our conclusions just differ. Now, how are we humans going to treat one another, despite our religious differences, political differences, our racial differences, our sexual differences, and everything else in the world that causes humans to mistreat one another because we all are not exactly like one another? We are called to love our neighbor as ourselves. It’s not easy, but it’s the Law that Jesus said inherits one life. That’s my conclusion.

Matthew Williamson

So what do you believe a marriage is and why? Who defines what a marriage is? Can a man marry a dog who loves their owner? Can a man marry 3 women? Can a man marry a 10 year old boy? Can a man marry his sister or maybe himself? If a marriage is not solely one man and one woman then what is it?

leecappella

Hi, Matthew. Your reply is a typical response to things I’ve said. Why do you (and many others) think that if same sex couples can marry, then that must mean humans can marry animals or adults can marry children? This is not the case, due to the very essence of love and what love is. There are guidelines that makeup what love is. Jesus’ Law of loving and treating others in the same manner as we would want to be treated ourselves does not allow for humans to marry animals or adults to marry a non-adult boy or girl. Let me explain.

As I see it, a human cannot marry an animal simply because a human cannot get the animal’s consent to do so. There is no way to get an animal’s consent. As a result, for a human to even try to marry a dog or any other animal would fall under the category of rape. Likewise, for an adult to marry a child, consent would be needed. For obvious reasons, that too would be likened unto rape. Sure, a child has the ability to agree to the marriage, but the child is not capable of making mature adult decisions. It can be easy to get a child to do something if the child is comfortable and trusts the adult already. That’s how pedophile’s get the child’s trust. However, because the child is, indeed, a child and not really capable of making mature decisions, the intent to marry a child, I believe, would be seen as an unloving act because love does not take advantage of someone due to someone’s situation. In this case, the situation would be that the child is just a child and incapable of making an adult decision involving an adult situation. So, you see, you can’t just love a child and think it’s okay to marry a child. Love itself requires lawful things to be meet the requirement of being called love. Marrying a child when a child is in the state of childhood and incapable of making adult decisions is not a loving act. Marrying an animal that cannot consent to marry a human is not a loving act.

Marriage is a union. It can be a union between a man and a woman, a man and a man, a woman and a woman, a company and another company, an agreement between two people in business or between two people in an intimate relationship, or more than two people in business, or more than two people in an intimate relationship, etc. Just because the opposite sexes have been marrying one another for centuries does not make marriage exclusive to heterosexuals. Marriage is not defined by the participating genders involved in the act. Marriage is defined by the act itself.

http://billylickhomes.com Billiethephillie

Thank god I am not catholic, methodist or any other organized religion that spews hate among certain defined groups. Thank god I am not Nazi, skin head, or any other group that thinks they are the supreme being. I donate time to food banks, cook in a soup kitchen and treat everybody fairly. Reading the bible might be good but not to be taken too seriously. And finally thank god I am not a member of the NRA

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

The problem is that some of your prophets & priests have translated the bible into what is good for them. Any time you are preaching hatred, you are preaching AGAINST God. You are bound & determined to condemn people & to set yourself up as judge & jury here on earth. I would think that GOD could handle this all by Himself without help from you all. Some of you are so busy deciding that everyone else is a sinner & enumerating their sins you forget that they ARE human beings too. You also forget that what YOU PREACH may not be correct, either.

tccstend

The Methodist Church has traditionally been a stalwart peace and justice organization. The institute on Religion and Democracy, a criminal organization, has been working to do this damage since Reagan. What is happening has nothing to do with the teachings of the Methodist Church. It has everything to do with a criminal attack on the church.

Glenna Jones-Kachtik

My husband used to have people tell him all the time that he was going to hell & describing in great detail what was going to take place. He used to tell them that he would be more afraid, maybe, if he actually believed in Hell but that he was really worried about them, because they seemed to know Hell too well…..

tccstend

See my comment just above.

tccstend

AND he’s a TRUE Methodist as well.

Cathy Jepson

I am a lapsed Lutheran and have not set foot in a church in over 15 years – no regrets and no repentance here. I have a deep and abiding faith in a higher power than myself and hope with all my heart for a life after death – there are a lot of dear ones that have left me I would love to see again. This minister did the CHRISTian thing and loved his son and other children unconditionally. It would be my guess there is a church out there somewhere in need of a truly Christ-centered minister who understands we are all made in God’s image and each is exactly as we should be. You did the right thing.

Don Gaffney

Im a combat veteran. Im not a nazi nor a skinhead. I supported the repeal of Dont Ask/Dont Tell and the right of my gay friends to serve openly in the military and to get married. I also have volunteered in feeding the homeless (as does my entire family). Im ALSO a member of the NRA. Funny when those who profess to be the least narrow minded turn out to be that which they fear. I appreciated your comment until you used it as an opportunity to make a political statement that had absolutely nothing to do with the article or this great pastor/dad/human being. Methinks thou dost project too much.

Kenny Pierce

Thank you, sir, for your service to our nation. To your kindnesses, that not only extend to the homeless and poor, but to my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters in Christ, whom you also call your friends. I think that our country could do well with the kind of grace and love that you’ve shown in your comments. All of these are VERY much appreciated by this gay Christian man, whose Dad served in Vietnam. I miss him very much, and I honor you for taking the time to write what you did.

God bless.

Rodney Mills

As a gay Son of a preacher, I wish my father had been this good of a man.

Robyn Ryan

Head to New Orleans!

John Mason

God tells us what hurts Him in the Ten Commands of the Law and in the Seven Deadly Sins. Neither Jesus, the Law, nor the 7 Sins even mention same-sex love (with the one exception where David mentioned loving Jonathan with a love similar to that for a woman). The Bible never mentions same-sex love beyond that. It does mention Levitical Laws that have fallen to the wayside thanks to the New Testament. It does mention same-sex rape in the story of Sodom. and yet another prophet remembers the sins of Sodom, and never mentions rape (Ezekiel 16:49).

We fear what we do not understand. We fear those stranger(s) to our acculturated Western way of thinking. This may be why we fear Islam. This may be why many of us fear immigrants. Some of us may even fear the unknown person because of a different color of skin. Jesus tells us in Matthew 25 what pleases and displeases God at the Judgment. How we treat the “other,” the “outsider,” or the “stranger” is integral to His message.

Ironically, at the Judgment, it is not how many unborn babies we saved, or how many homosexuals we sent to hell, nor how many pastors we defrocked. His list does not mention how we protected the right to own guns. It does not mention how many we “judged” worthy of capital punishment and put to death. He does not even mention how many souls we led to Him.

Have WE read the Jesus List about what hurts God and what pleases God? The Church needs to refocus on its mission, and stop the lunacy about same sex love and marriage. We have left greater matters of the law undone. “How can we love God Whom we have not seen if we do not love others whom we see every day?” Where is the Good News of our Gospel in all this hell fire and damnation, in all of this homophobia. in all this fear? “Love, when perfected, casts out fear!” ~ Pastor John Mason

PT

Don’t get me wrong, I most certainly do would not advocate any form of
prejudice or hate, toward people who are practicing homosexuals. It’s
not my business to tell people how to live their lives. But there is no
way I can read the bible and somehow twist it to say that this is Gods
will!

To read the following passage any other way than the plainly obvious
condemnation of homosexual sexual relations, is simply to deceive
one’s-self.

Romans 1 vs 24 onward
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful
desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their
bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a
lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who
is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to
shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for
unnatural ones. 27 In
the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and
were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts
with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their
error.
END VRS

If people want to do that, then it’s no business of mine to stop
them. According to the bible God created and defined marriage. Should
two men or two women wish to marry one another then It is no business of
mine to stop them, but you have to use very unusual hermeneutics to
claim the bible is pro gay marriage. Gay people are perfectly free to do
as they please, even to claim that God is blessing their marriage. But
that “god’ is clearly not the God in the Christian bible.

Above URL contains writing which espouse some different points of view. You may already be familiar with them.

wolfendenpackleader

all it said in the Old Testament was that God wanted people “to love one another.” no mention of gender and besides, they are born that way. if God didn’t like or want gay people on earth, they would not exist as God claims to have known “you” before you were born, during your life on earth and long after you have died. so if God did not intend for gays to exist, they wouldn’t. for you believers, God is watching how you treat his children, every color, every sexual orientation, deal with your inner demons as you are the ones with the problem.
.

Sally

He has no self. He is an idea. A hope. But if He can be hurt, you are correct. We are not to hurt others, no matter what they do to us.

trixxxus

It’s hard for me to believe that any Methodist organization would align itself to the Roman Catholic Church and Evangelicals in their abusive hate of gays etc. It’s so not this century. So stupid and ignorant that it defies logic….shame on them.

Ann Hartley

Is this a thank you God for making you perfect? Because you cook soup, treat everyone fairly and are not a member of any groups populated by bad people?
Hmmmm lots of perfect people around I guess.

Wally

Hi Ann; Did you ever think about and realize that God and his prophets, including Jesus had no religion that they were propogating? God Herself has no religion. And look how you noticed how I said “God Herself”. We cannot try to understand the infinite with our finite minds. But we can with our infinite souls or heart spirit. Name; who you responded to is really fulfilling the highest law that Jesus declared when asked by his disciples “What is the greatest law, Master?” And He answered “The greatest law is to love God with all your heart mind and soul and your neighbor as yourself. In this, all the laws of God are fulfilled. So NAME is right on track. And yes as you say “there are lots of perfect people around”. I might add that we are all imperfectly perfect as we can be no different as we are at the moment but room for more awareness and growth is awesome for us all. Blessings and Light to you Ann.

Bill

Sounds a LOT like terrorist talk.

WinnieMe

As a United Methodist Pastor’s wife of over 35 years, and a UM Pastor’s daughter… I am ASHAMED of the UM church for this decision. What the heck is the UM church THINKING? We are about SOCIAL JUSTICE. Not this bigotry. One of our daughters has LEFT the UM Church because of their stance on this issue. I may follow her.

PT

Quote God “Herself has no religion.”

According to the Christian bible, God describes HIMSELF as a perfect heavenly Father.

I think he’s very clear on that. It’s not to say he is sexist or biased, it’s just the way God chose to reveal himself to us. We can’t change the way He revealed his nature.

Matthew Williamson

I can’t believe the stuff I am reading on this page. How about we just start marrying pedophiles, transvestites, family members (incest), and man and beast? There is NO way you can justify taking a standard of one man and one woman equals a marriage and change it to now allow for partners of the same sex because they use the argument that God made them that way and they have no choice in the matter but then leave out those who say that God made them the way THEY are and they have no choice in the matter. From on let’s just say that a Marriage is whatever anyone wants it to be. I will just go ahead and marry my dog or sister if I very well please. I have no problem shaking a gay man’s hand, hold a conversation with him, give him a hug, nothing like that but there is a Godly standard and truth to an institution that He created.

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Because that’s your God, not everyone else’s God. In my Bible, poverty is mentioned over 2,000 times and homosexuality about 5 – most of those 5 times it’s in reference to not sleeping with an angel and not raping. But you feel free to concentrate on those 5 times, and I’ll concentrate on the 2,000 times poverty is mentioned. My God is a loving deity. He does not discriminate and he made us each unique for a reason.

You have a nice night.

Matthew Williamson

My God is a loving God as well. He demonstrated that by sending his only son to die on a cross for yours and my sins. When the woman was caught in adultery and brought before Jesus for condemnation he did not condemn her. He pointed out the faults in others and told her that he did not condemn her but he didn’t stop there. He said “go and sin no more”. He recognized that what she had done was sin. He didn’t stone her for it but recognized what she had done was wrong and told her to stop doing it. He would do and tell the homosexual the same thing. How many times something is or is not mentioned in the Bible does not determine it’s truthfulness. Jesus didn’t do a whole lot for poverty while on the earth, not in the physical sense, but he did everything in the spiritual sense. I’m not mad at your post or at you. Just making comments.

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Jesus never said that being gay is a sin so I really don’t get your point. It’s not listed in the 10 Commandments either.

PT

Read the post: He said Romans 1:21-29.

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Matthew did not quote a verse.

PT

YES he did. Romans1:21-29

In the post before you said Jesus never said being gay was wrong. Re-read it.

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Read the verse. You’re wrong, and so is your friend.

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

bwhaaa. great minds and all that…..

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

But poverty is mentioned 2,000 times and we don’t hear a peep from Republicans.

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

Sure we do – just not anything relating to helping the poor. Just that damn boot strap line.

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Great minds again. I was going to add, aside from picking themselves up by their bootstraps. I don’t have any straps on my boots, for the record. Who sells these boots and how can poor people afford them?

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

Exactly. I have a couple pairs of boots, none have straps but I can see how they’d be handy but not for picking myself up with. How does that work exactly, am I supposed to be able to lift my own body weight? If so, how long to I have to be able to hold myself up? All of this assumes we can find a place to buy (cheap) said boots, and why is there no TBFDC (temporary boots for dependent children) or SSB (supplemental security boots) for those qualifying for assistance?

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

Once we pick ourselves up, won’t gravity bring us back down? Come on!

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

damn you, science!

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

It does explain why some repubs don’t believe in that gravity bullshit.

PT

Look nowhere in this passage is it saying that exchanging natural relations is ok with God.

Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

This passage doesn’t simply limit the term natural relations to prostitution!! ?? Just how on earth do you read that into this passage?? Mathew used this passage to highlight the fact that the bible speaks very very clearly about the subject of homosexuality. God does not single out gay people, as if he is somehow maliciously targeting a minority group. God perfect standard demands every aspect of our lives come under his Lordship. THAT IS THE GOSPEL. We die to our self and are raised in Christ. When a person is baptised this is what it symbolises. We obey God, AND ALSO help the poor, we do not neglect either

http://FreakoutNation.com/ Anomaly 100

If you followed Jesus’ teachings you would try to reduce poverty. Your verse, is manipulated by you and your party.

No matter how many capitals you use, it’s still not going to make sense. I only follow the new testament.

The old testament:

Unmarried women were not allowed to leave the home of their father without permission.

Married women were not allowed to leave the home of their husband, without permission.

They were normally restricted to roles of little or no authority.

They could not testify in court.

They could not appear in public venues.

They were not allowed to talk to strangers.

They had to be doubly veiled when they left their homes.

http://www.tumblr.com/blog/akinsc Carla Akins

You’re wrong. The verse is about idolatry and prostitution.

SurvivorGirl

There is no way that Jesus would have asked someone to go and sin no more in the way that you’ve stated. He wasn’t telling her to go and clean up her act but to enter into relationship with Him. Do you continue to sin? Do I? Yes, of course. What He conveyed when He interacted with this woman was that in and through Him, her relationship with sin is utterly changed, as in, she is dead to it (eternally speaking). He was offering her LIFE to the fullest (Kingdom life), not a morality program (which is death). Per the OT/Old Covenant way, she deserved to be stoned to death. Per the New Covenant/Jesus’ way, she was deserving of new life in Him. Most of the fault-finding he called out in others had to do with the harsh judgments and burdens that the Pharisees were putting on people.

Matthew Williamson

There really isn’t any reason to debate this any further unless your willing to admit that homosexuality is sin. Read Romans 1:21-29. It is clear, and just because the word “homosexuality” is not used doesn’t mean that it is not what is being clearly referenced to. You are right that even after accepting Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior we do commit sins. The difference is not that I am “Sinless” but I do “sin less”. Romans 6:1-2 says “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” Yes, we are dead to sin in Christ but Paul makes it clear that we should not use that as excuse to continue in sin. Jesus very well knew that that woman would commit more sins in her life just like he knows you and I will. Despite your disagreement with me though He was telling her to go and no longer commit the sin of adultery. I am a preacher of grace and not law but that doesn’t mean that grace gives us the freedom to continue in willful disobedience to God and His word.

leecappella

Matthew, I think your view of what Paul is saying in Romans chapter one is not in alignment with Paul’s intention to those he was addressing. Meaning, what you read in that chapter, seemingly, comes from a 21st century mindset that results in the assumption that Romans chapter one is talking about the very same homosexuality that you are familiar with in the 21st century. You may feel that any form of homosexuality is being addressed in Romans chapter one, but the context of the verses in question confirms that Paul is referencing specified homosexual acts that were associated with pagan idolatrous religious practices that were done in service to man made images (ie. idols). Such homosexual religious rituals were considered works or Jobs (ie. things people did for religious reasons out service and devotion to their god(s). Since the letters in Romans were written to an audience that already understood the details of what went on in pagan temples and they already knew the difference between the Jobs of the Torah and the Justices of the Torah and the division of the two, they knew what Paul meant when he said that those involved in the pagan homosexual sex rituals received within themselves the penalty for doing such things. In other words, the participants paid the penalty, in some way, within their own person for engaging in pagan religious rituals involving homosexuality. Their penalty was not a death penalty. What they did was not worthy of death.

However, when Paul goes from Romans 1:27 to verse 28, he ends his talk of idolatrous homosexual orgies in pagan temples and in verse 28, he begins speaking of things that are worthy of death. Remember, Paul stated that the homosexual sex rituals were not deserving of the death penalty. Instead, the appropriate penalty was received within the persons of those involved. Death was not the penalty to be paid because those involved were not guilty of breaking any commandments based on brotherly love. They were guilty of breaking commandments based on works or Jobs of the Torah. Commandments that Jesus said no longer were applicable. Because the works of the Torah were no longer necessary to keep, Paul could not and would not deem them worthy of death. Paul knew that the Jews he was addressing still believed that they had to keep the whole law of Moses, which included the the Jobs or works of the Torah. To the Jews, homosexuality as a violation of the law as they knew it. However, Paul’s intention was to present pagan homosexual idolatry as an example of a Job or work of the law that was no longer binding so that he could lead his message into what really mattered, which was the Justices of the law, which are all the commandments based on brotherly love and how you treat your neighbor. This is why the things listed in Romans 1:29-31 are worthy of death: because they violate the law of loving thy neighbor as thyself. Paul wanted the Jews to know that they boasted of things that no longer mattered in the law of Moses. Since no one is justified by any works of the law (Romans 3:20), boasting is excluded, per Paul and his message of Jesus’ Faith of loving and treating others in the same way we would want to be treated. Paul set up his letter to the Romans with the intent of taking something the Jews boasted of in their law, made them think he was for the death penalty, and then he used that example of works to let the Jews know that the only things worthy of death are the unloving, unkind, mistreatment of one’s fellow man. Paul said the Jews were guilty of such things, despite the fact that they boasted in keeping the Torah’s commandments based on works. His point was that because they kept the Jobs or the works, that was not going to justify them before God. Works do not exonerate. Only the commandments based on loving thy neighbor as thyself exonerate. The measure of godliness is held up next to the Law of Christ and if something breaks that Law, it is sin. IMHO.

leecappella

Apparently, Anomaly 100’s God is a loving God, just as your God is a loving God. Both of you are, likely, referring to the same God, but because each of you have different experiences and perceptions of God, it sounds like you two are referring to two different deities when you probably aren’t. The same is applicable to me and everyone else.

The woman caught in adultery was told to go and sin no more. What did that mean? She was human, so there is no way that she left there sinless and never to do anything wrong again. So to go and sin no more must have meant something else. Maybe, for her to learn from her mistake and never to commit that particular sin again? Nonetheless, yes, God is a loving God. Yes, God loves all of humanity so much so that even while we were sinners, Jesus died for the sins of us all. However, that does not mean that Jesus would consider a homosexuality a sin because adultery is considered a sin. I don’t think Jesus would tell a homosexual man to go and sin no more, with the reference of sin being on the homosexual man’s love for another homosexual man.

Being the issuer of the Law, I think Jesus would see, just as Paul did, that a man loving another man is not a violation of the very Law that Jesus himself declared as the godly standard. Sure, some people will have issue with a man loving another man, intimately, but because other humans have an issue with something that is lawful within the guidelines of the Law’s commandments does not make it a sin to God. It only makes it a sin the individual that deems it a sin according to his or her personal beliefs. Romans chapter 14 talks about the relationship between the weak persons of faith and the strong persons of faith. It speaks of the stronger persons of faith who accept certain things that the weaker persons of faith do not accept. Eating meat offered to idols is an example. Observing certain days is another. Eventually, this chapter tells us that if something does not break the Law (not the Law of Moses, but the Law of Christ), then it is lawful. Jesus’ Law does not care what a person eats, but because the Law of Moses prohibited certain foods, including meat associated with idolatrous practices, some people would not eat meat that had been offered to idols, believing it was a sin. If something is not breaking the Law of loving and treating others in the way that we would want to be loved and treated, then it is only unclean to the person who thinks it is unclean. It’s not unclean in and of itself. Again, this is only applicable to things that do not break the Law that Jesus established in the utterance, love thy neighbor as thyself.

Homosexuality is the very same thing. It does not break the only Law we should be living by. Therefore, it is lawful and within the guidelines of the Law itself. Some people of faith do not have an issue with it, while others do. But, it is only unclean to them because they deem it to be such. It’s not unclean to God because God’s Law does not find fault with it. In and of itself, homosexuality does not cause harmful mistreatment to one’s neighbor. Just as, in and of itself, heterosexuality does not cause harm and mistreatment to one’s neighbor. Happy is the man who does not condemn himself in the thing that he allows. If he does condemn himself, to him it is sin. This is in reference to only those things that the Law allows. If the Law does not allow something, there is no debate about it, as I see it. If it breaks the Law of loving others, then it is a sin to God. If it does not break the Law of loving others, it is up to the individual to decide for themselves if it is a sin, like eating meat offered to idols, observing (or not observing certain days), etc.

You mentioned to Anomaly 100 that “how many times something is or is not mentioned in the Bible does not determine it’s truthfulness.” I agree. I would also like to add this: Just because something has been believed by Christians for centuries does not mean that it is what should be believed because it has been believed for so long. Today’s Christians believe in eternal (ie. unending) punishment. First century believers believed in temporary punishment. There are various reason why many people don’t agree on things. Knowledge is power. Not the only power, but power, nonetheless. I, too, am just making comments. I like to share:)

leecappella

Yes, there is a godly standard and it is summed up in the utterance, love thy neighbor as thyself. That is the Law. That is the godly standard that Jesus gave humanity to live by. Homosexuality does not break that Law. It only breaks that Law in contexts of harmful mistreatment of one’s fellow man, such as the case in the Sodom and Gomorrah story, for example.

nytw

So are you liberals going to get out your little white gloves and start slapping each other on the cheek.